So, they described an SUV, lol.
2018 Unreliable? CR verdict: 2 out of 5
- Thread starter Phyzman
- Start date
So, they described an SUV, lol.
Consumer reports is a legitimate non-profit. Doesn't mean what they say is accurate, but you can check out their IRS form 990 if you want to see where their funding comes from. Would probably be nice to do before you accuse them of something. A better claim would be to say that they simply don't have the right people making subjective calls. I think everyone has raised an eyebrow at something that CR says...
When I was first shopping for a 4runner, I cross-shopped with diesel grand cherokee's. My preferred method of research was to check out the forums. It was pretty obvious which vehicle was more reliable -- the 4runner forum was 90% posts about mods and random stuff, 10% about problems. The cherokee forum was 90% problems, 10% mods/random.
Last edited:
yes, from people who have owned the vehicle at least 12 months
the 2018 rating is still just a predicted reliability, CR uses the past 3 years model ratings for the predicted reliability meaning this 2/5 rating is obviously an error since the past 3 model years all have good reliability. anyone getting upset about this is ridiculous, CR is a nonprofit with pretty unbiased reviews there is just obviously a mistake on the website.
Last edited:
Please refrain from calling attention to the obvious and reasonable explanation for the rating. Some of us enjoy watching the hysteria develop unchecked.
2016 4Runner SR5
Senior Member
LOL you're quite the man of useless words and you have a whole lot to learn. What do you drive? Do you even own a 4Runner? If you post something on a public forum, be ready for people to reply and be ready to deal with it. Sorry buttercup but not everyone is going to agree with you especially when you have one source and a pretty useless source at that. If you really want to prove your point or actually care to do your own homework and not be lazy, google the reviews on the 2018, which is identical to the 14, 15, 16, 17, and 19 and is just as reliable as the 4R of those years. 10-13 is very close, same engine, transmission, diffs, all the things you would concern yourself with, but they did change the interior and body style in 14 and it's a good thing they did. The Limited and Pro would be the only exception to that having different suspension under the Pro and the Limited is AWD
Loggerhead
New member
Hahaha. This is exactly how I would describe the 4Runner. I came from a Highlander and after I traded it for the Runner I drove it for a couple of days and was just a little concerned that I’d made a poor decision. But then I put the Bilstein 5100’s on, realized exactly what the truck was, and then I fell in love with it. Yes, it could do with more power out of the hole and the entry into the cabin is weird but I still love it. It’s fun to drive.
As far as reliability goes I’ve got about 10k on mine so far and no issues. Only time will tell about its reliability but I’ve heard nothing but good things about them fro people who’ve owned multiple 4Runners.
To the OP, as a first time owner and a guy in the car business I can tell you two things, (1) The 4Runner is a cracker box shaped, off-road capable vehicle with tons of third party accessory support and (2) Even if for some reason you don’t like it you’ll have no problem unloading it. These things hold their value like gang busters. Obviously, the Wranglers do too but I’ve had my go round with Chrysler products and they’ll never get my money again, no matter how popular they are.
In the end, do your research and talk to long term owners. You’ll find the best info from those guys. I’m like some others on here, the CR report does seem odd especially since previous years have done well.
Last edited:
It does seem strange the "2/5" is in regards to reliability.
If it's in regards to features vs. the competition, then **** yeah it deserves a 2/5. I love my 4Runner which is why I dumped a high performance, high tech muscle car to get back into one after only a few months. But its features are definitely lacking compared to other brands, but it makes up for it in being a very unique vehicle when no other brand has [what I would consider to be] a competitor.
I don't ever understand the "rough sounding" engine statements. Maybe it's because I'm used to loud, rumbling V8s, but I never even notice the engine in the 4Runner.
But yeah, the 4Runner is the only vehicle I've owned (and I've owned at least a dozen vehicles in 15 years) that I get in and drive care-free without any concern about something going wrong at any point in time, so in regards to overall reliability, 2/5 seems bizarre.
As someone in the market for a new vehicle and hoping for something non-luxury with BOF, I’m channeled into a very limited set of options. 4Runner and Wrangler.
My preference is the T4R, I just wish Toyota didn’t hate it as much as they do. But they’ve left it fairly untouched since 2009 (and even that was not a huge refresh from 4th Gen). Five-speed, Entune, and no modern safety features.
That begs cross shopping with the Wrangler, which FCA has brought into the 2010s as of the JL.I will say that the Wrangler cult is more drunk on their own Koolaid than the T4R cult has any need to be.
Wranglests dismiss the 1-star safety rating because they’re such skilled drivers they’ll never be in an accident. They dismiss the weekly recall notices under the moniker of “all new vehicles have this many problems”. Every conceivable problem that the Wrangler has is to be forgiven because it’s such an exciting vehicle to own and drive. They see 4Rs as ancient and boring, and incapable of wheeling. Unless you’re running beadlock 40s on a lifted Rubi, you’re not to be taken seriously.
The 4Runnests proclaim that extreme ancientness is the sole path to reliability. Five gears are plenty, and Entune may be old, but it won’t break down! And safety features are for sissies! Well, I guess such thinking will force Toyota to double production on 2019s, since the 2020 is going to be inched into the 2010s with its infotainment and TSS-P. Fans of 2009-era SUVs will scoop these gems up like collectors items ahead of the 2020MY.
And 6th Gen? We don’t need no stinking 6th Gen! Says Toyota as they focus on Highlander and Rav4 to the exclusion of the 4R.
At this preliminary stage, I’m leaning toward a 2020 4R ORP. But I’m not in a panicked rush. The research phase is filled with amusement. There is much to be learned in the online forums. And there is much to be learned from independent rating agencies.
Forums have useful info mixed in with cultish zealotry. True Believers in both camps will assure you in the same manner that salespeople at dealerships will that “there is no comparison” between the 4Runner and the Wrangler (or—heaven forbid—a Grand Cherokee). And they have strongly-held personal opinions coupled with cherry-picked anecdotes to back them up.
Rating agencies will do everything they can to steer buyers away from the BOF options since unibody “ski lodge weekenders” (unibodies) are more comfortable, nimble, safe, and modern. I mean, the Edmunds “Forester vs. 4Runner” review ... who thought that was a good idea? Silliest mashup I’ve seen so far.
sandcrawler
Senior Member
Consumer Reports may be useful for objective comparisons of parity products (batteries) but not at all for subjective reviews (vehicles).
hamburglar210
New member
Take a look at a newer GX460 or the 470. It's the Prado (V8) with a Lexus badge and there a tons of upgrades floating around for the 470. It's definitely considered luxury but they can be every bit as capable as the 4Runner and outside of the air-ride suspensions, are just as reliable.
Or just get what everyone here really wants, the Land Cruiser.
90Duck
New member
CR thoughts
I find CR to be useful in general, but you have to keep in mind that they also review lots of refrigerators and dishwashers. In my view, they treat cars like they do appliances, which tends to lead to crossover SUVs rising to the top of the ratings because they get better mileage, have a practical form factor, feature lots of safety features, and are generally reliable for an average non-enthusiast buyer to just drive to work or wherever. There aren't a lot of appliance enthusiasts out there, and that's not who CR caters to.
The last time I bought a car largely off of CR ratings was a 2011 Subaru Forester. It checked all of the boxes mentioned above, and was the most boring car I have ever owned. My wife hated it. It led directly to me buying a WRX as an antidote (mid-life crisis?), which CR absolutely hates. The Forester burned oil at an alarming rate but was otherwise OK. The WRX has been rock solid and fun as hell. For my purposes in a snowy mountain town and loving cars in general, it is just about perfect. But, most non-car enthusiasts would agree with CR that it is too noisy, harsh riding, and unrefined. I don't really care about that stuff as much as I do the acceleration and handling. And, it looks cool.
When it came time to replace our 2004 Honda Pilot, I checked CRs reliability rating, but took the rest of their opinions with a big grain of salt because I knew what the 4Runner was all about. If I didn't want the off-road abilities, I likely would have bought another Pilot or a Highlander.
I snipped the overview below off the CR website, right below where they give it a 2/5 for reliability. It seems likely that they have a bust in their program somewhere; it just doesn't make much sense that it would drop like that for 2018 without there being a major change in the drivetrain, which we all know there hasn't been for a long time. For me, the two positives they note outweighed the negatives. And, it looks cool.
As a side note, the only time I have ever received the CR owner survey was when I was a subscriber, so it is somewhat of a feedback loop of rolling appliance drivers, in my opinion.
I find CR to be useful in general, but you have to keep in mind that they also review lots of refrigerators and dishwashers. In my view, they treat cars like they do appliances, which tends to lead to crossover SUVs rising to the top of the ratings because they get better mileage, have a practical form factor, feature lots of safety features, and are generally reliable for an average non-enthusiast buyer to just drive to work or wherever. There aren't a lot of appliance enthusiasts out there, and that's not who CR caters to.
The last time I bought a car largely off of CR ratings was a 2011 Subaru Forester. It checked all of the boxes mentioned above, and was the most boring car I have ever owned. My wife hated it. It led directly to me buying a WRX as an antidote (mid-life crisis?), which CR absolutely hates. The Forester burned oil at an alarming rate but was otherwise OK. The WRX has been rock solid and fun as hell. For my purposes in a snowy mountain town and loving cars in general, it is just about perfect. But, most non-car enthusiasts would agree with CR that it is too noisy, harsh riding, and unrefined. I don't really care about that stuff as much as I do the acceleration and handling. And, it looks cool.
When it came time to replace our 2004 Honda Pilot, I checked CRs reliability rating, but took the rest of their opinions with a big grain of salt because I knew what the 4Runner was all about. If I didn't want the off-road abilities, I likely would have bought another Pilot or a Highlander.
I snipped the overview below off the CR website, right below where they give it a 2/5 for reliability. It seems likely that they have a bust in their program somewhere; it just doesn't make much sense that it would drop like that for 2018 without there being a major change in the drivetrain, which we all know there hasn't been for a long time. For me, the two positives they note outweighed the negatives. And, it looks cool.
As a side note, the only time I have ever received the CR owner survey was when I was a subscriber, so it is somewhat of a feedback loop of rolling appliance drivers, in my opinion.
Attachments
When "loud engine roar" is considered a "low", I know I'm not looking at a review opinion that is catered to me, unless they meant it more in line with "engine rattles like a maraca" or something like that.
CR gave the 2008 FJ a 1/5 for fuel efficiency probably because they recorded a 13/17/21 mpg
2008 Toyota FJ Cruiser Reviews, Ratings, Prices - Consumer Reports
They gave the Highlander a 2/5, it has better highway performance 13/18/26
2008 Toyota Highlander Reviews, Ratings, Prices - Consumer Reports
you guys get mad over nothing
2008 Toyota FJ Cruiser Reviews, Ratings, Prices - Consumer Reports
They gave the Highlander a 2/5, it has better highway performance 13/18/26
2008 Toyota Highlander Reviews, Ratings, Prices - Consumer Reports
you guys get mad over nothing
1000MPH
Senior Member
Try the actual 2007 reviews.
Why? You stated 2008-2009. It appears now that your recollection was in error.
If your allegation of bias is substantiated in the 2007 reviews, the burden is on you to back it up with the damning evidence. Otherwise we must consider your allegation to be baseless.
Last edited:
Similar threads
